글로버메뉴 바로가기 본문 바로가기 하단메뉴 바로가기

논문검색은 역시 페이퍼서치

Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics (Journal of PAAL )검색


  • - 주제 : 어문학분야 > 언어학
  • - 성격 : 학술지
  • - 간기: 반년간
  • - 국내 등재 : KCI 등재
  • - 해외 등재 : -
  • - ISSN : 1345-8353
  • - 간행물명 변경 사항 :
논문제목
수록 범위 : 21권 2호 (2017)
초록보기
Though generally under-utilised in spoken English, the passive voice plays a crucial role in formal, written English (Biber et al., 1999). An understanding of how the passive voice operates in English writing is therefore a vital skill for EFL learners in secondary and higher education so that they may be able to both understand and produce fluent and accurate formal English writing. Using samples of Japanese high school learners’ writing, this paper sought to shed light on why many Japanese EFL learners struggle to produce accurate passive constructions in English writing. The paper begins by examining how the passive voice is used in English, focusing on core passive forms, “pseudopassives” (Balcom, 2001), agency, and transitivity. Conveying a sense of objectivity (such as through the use of agentless passives) is also highlighted as a crucial feature of the use of the passive voice in formal, written English. Comparing the use of the passive voice in Japanese to its use in English reveals some structural and functional similarities, although there are some syntactic differences - particularly in relation to verb conjugation. The role of transitivity is also a key point of difference between the two languages. Unlike in Japanese, intransitive verbs cannot be passivised in English. Japanese EFL learners are often able to produce fluent, accurate passive structures in English, especially when the agent and patient are clearly identified. However, many Japanese EFL learners struggle with agentless passives in English - whereas in Japanese agents are almost always specified (Watanabe et al., 1991), the agent is often omitted in written English. This can lead to L1 transfer, the (incorrect) iteration and fossilisation of novel passive constructions. Increasing Japanese EFL learners’ exposure to different varieties of English passive constructions is suggested as a potential means of remedying this problem. In addition, focusing on correct passive structure form (through explicit instruction and spoken/written corrective feedback) during in-class written production may also prove to be effective.

A Contrastive Rhetoric Analysis of English and Hindi Editorials

( M. Ali Bolgun ) , ( Asham Mangla )
6,500
초록보기
This study explores and identifies a number of key qualitative and quantitative differences in textual discourse styles in English and Hindi editorials found in the New York Times (NYT) and Navbharat, respectively. These differences could be the source of strenuous processing of such editorials by learners of Hindi. Our contrastive rhetoric analysis reveals that, in general, NYT editorials are more detailed and stand-alone pieces; that is to say, writer-responsible. The arguments, suggestions, and recommendations therein are directly stated. The main argument appears early, and details are provided later, following a deductive writing style. Also, there is an observed avoidance of passive voice constructions. Navbharat editorials, on the other hand, seem to rely on readers’ background knowledge of the issue presented and, therefore, consists of fewer details and, as such, are reader-responsible. The arguments, suggestions, and recommendations are often indirectly stated. The main argument is often missing or stated at the end of the editorial after a number of details are provided, evidencing an inductive writing style. In Navbharat editorials, there is also an observed ample use of passive voice constructions. Rhetorical organization of editorials in each of these publications may work for the readership of the respective publications within the culture in which they operate. However, such differences would require language professionals to develop teaching materials and strategies to help learners comprehend editorials and other high level texts in each of the respective languages. To that end, we are suggesting a few strategies.
5,400
초록보기
The present study aimed to profile the developmental patterns of discourse in second language (L2) writings among different first language (L1) groups. Applying the list of metadiscourse markers proposed by Ken Hyland to learner language, this study investigates variation of metadiscourse across proficiency levels, as well as across L1 backgrounds. Using the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English, the present study compared the frequencies of metadiscourse markers used in the writings among different learner groups. The results suggest that the six learner groups that were compared have diverse frequency change patterns of metadiscourse features across proficiency levels. To be specific, Japanese learners’ heavy reliance on self-mentions and boosters is remarkably antithetical to Thai learners’ preference of engagement markers and hedges. Moreover, B2 and higher level learners in China and Taiwan exhibited greater numbers of evidential patterns (hereafter evidentials) than learners in other groups. These differences can be attributable to their L1 rhetorical strategy, not to their lexical and grammatical competence. Therefore, we should consider the idiosyncrasies in metadiscourse of each L1 group when assessing L2 learners based on their language performance.
초록보기
There are some English verbs that can be used both intransitively and transitively. Verbs such as break, close, and melt can appear in intransitive active, transitive active, and passive constructions. Although native English speakers know in what kind of context a target verb is used in a certain construction, previous studies have shown that EFL learners, including Japanese learners of English (JLEs), face difficulties in choosing the appropriate construction of these verb types. The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, I examined JLEs’ sensitivity to the transitivity of such English verbs by using an animation-based acceptability judgment test. This examination was in comparison with some native English speakers (NESs). Second, I investigated which construction of such verbs JLEs tend to use in an animation-based composition test. The results of this study suggest the following: (1) In the animation-based acceptability judgment test, JLEs accepted the passive more than the NESs did in some contexts with the exception of fall, and (2) in the animation-based composition test, JLEs preferred to use the intransitive of fall and the transitive of drop.
1